Announcer:

The following program is part of our “Here and Now” 2018 Wisconsin Vote election coverage.

Frederica Freyberg:

I'm Frederica Freyberg. Tonight on “Here and Now,” unpacking Tuesday's election results with UW-Milwaukee’s Mordecai Lee. Then, central Wisconsin's concerns about Chinese tariffs on ginseng. A Norwegian delegation gets an inside look at a Wisconsin school, a school practicing trauma-informed care. And separating the fake from the real news of the Sinclair controversy. It’s “Here and Now” for April 6.

Announcer:

Funding for “Here and Now” is provided, in part, by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.

Frederica Freyberg:

The statewide race Tuesday for the open seat on the high court was seen by the national press as the latest bellwether indicator heading into the November midterms. While not a partisan position, the Supreme Court race was certainly painted with a partisan brush, including direct contributions from the Republican Party. On the other side, endorsements from Joe Biden and Eric Holder. So when Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Rebecca Dallet, the candidate endorsed by the Democrats, defeated Republican-backed Michael Screnock by 12 points, even Governor Scott Walker sounded the alarm for his party, tweeting “Tonight’s results show we are at risk of a blue wave in Wisconsin. The far left is driven by anger and hatred. We must counter it with optimism and organization. Let’s share our positive story with voters. Win in November. Where's a political scientist when you need one? In Milwaukee. Mordecai Lee is a professor in the UW-Milwaukee Department of Political Science. Thanks very much for being here.

Mordecai Lee:

Thank you, Frederica.

Frederica Freyberg:

I read one account that said you were “astonished” by the results. Has the 12-point win set in yet for you?

Mordecai Lee:

I'm still astonished. And in part, everybody’s focusing on the margin of victory. I was focusing on the turnout. When you have a turnout that comes near a million people voting, that’s above average when it comes to a statewide race. So I think something was going on here. An average race would have been 700,000 to 800,000.

Frederica Freyberg:

So what do you think was going on? Organization? Money?

Mordecai Lee:

I think it’s exactly what Governor Walker described. I think it’s the unhappiness by Democrats mostly in reaction to Trump, but partly in reaction to the Republican legislature and governor. There’s a kind of an element of people that when you’re angry, when you’re unhappy, you’re more motivated than when you’re happy, when you’re contented. I think the Tea Party was the perfect example. Some people were unhappy when Obama got elected. And the Tea Party rose and then the Republican Party did very well in the elections after that. So what we’re seeing here is something we really haven’t seen before in recent Wisconsin politics. All along there had been something of a Republican network or a Republican machine. In other words, they all voted as a block. They all agreed with each other. This is the first time we’ve seen Democrats in a kind of invisible network. The reason we can tell is from the results of the referendum. That this was a relatively minor issue, but it’s like everybody who voted for the referendum also voted for Dallet.

Frederica Freyberg:

So you are saying that this blue wave that Republicans fear is real?

Mordecai Lee:

I think it’s real. And another reason why it’s real is that when it happens in an election for let’s say the U.S. Senate. There was the special election down south or a special election for the U.S. House in Pennsylvania, one could describe that as particularly about the federal government. But here we had a statewide race that was not about the federal government. Wasn’t even about the state legislature or the governor, and yet we had a similar huge turnout, just this blue wave. So I think it is correct to describe it that way. You know, Governor Walker is a fabulous politician whether one agrees with him or no. And he described it that way, and I think he’s right. And maybe in retrospect this explains why he was so strongly against holding those special elections for the vacant seats in the state legislature. That he’s got this fingertip feel for the voters and he sort of knew what might be coming.

Frederica Freyberg:

So if this was a proxy, though, do you think it was about Scott Walker or Donald Trump?

Mordecai Lee:

Well, that’s a great question. And if anybody knew that answer, they’d be able to predict the results of the November election. I suspect it’s a little bit of both. In other words, voting against Republicans as a whole. Voting sort of a voice against Trump. Voting against Scott Walker, particularly because he had endorsed the Constitutional amendment referendum. So it is significant in terms of what’s going on.

Frederica Freyberg:

So Dallet won 24 counties that Trump won in 2016. What’s your reaction to that?

Mordecai Lee:

Well, partly it goes back to our conversation about turnout. In other words, a presidential turnout is always the high watermark every four years. And these spring elections tend to be the low watermark. The fact that it was above average is an indication that more Democrats were voting. In Wisconsin politics, the higher the turnout, the more it skews left. The lower the turnout, the more it skews to the right. And in particular I think Dallet found something that no Democrat in Wisconsin had found so far. She found a way to talk about values. After all, if you think about American and Wisconsin politics for the last 10 or 15 years, it was Republicans who talked about values, social values, family values. It was like they had a monopoly on values and the Democrats were just sort of empty. She found a way to talk about values in a way that solidified the identification of the voters. They felt comfortable with those kinds of values. I think Democrats are going to try to learn from that.

Frederica Freyberg:

Speaking of values, in some ways the Republicans in this race said her values were actually partisan positions. But Judge Dallet had Eric Holder and Joe Biden, as we said. Judge Screnock had money from the state Republican Party. This final question. Was primary candidate Tim Burns right? Is it a charade to believe that these races are nonpartisan?

Mordecai Lee:

It really is. It’s a de facto partisan race. We probably ought to go all the way, go all in. And have them be declared that way. And it’s a shame because for the earlier generation, the races for Supreme Court were not with such a close partisan identification. The problem with nonpartisan elections is that it confuses the voters about who’s on which team. You vote for county board. Is your county supervisor on the opposition team or the ruling governing coalition? So maybe the whole idea of nonpartisan elections has just not worked out the way the good government reformers 100 years ago thought it would.

Frederica Freyberg:

Mordecai Lee, thank you, as always.

Mordecai Lee:

You're welcome. Thanks for inviting me.

Frederica Freyberg:

President Trump’s plan to impose tariffs on Chinese aluminum and steel was met this week with China’s own plan to target tariffs a growing list of U.S. agricultural exports. This list caught the eye of Wisconsin growers because of two items in particular: cranberries and ginseng. The latter accounted for $20 million in state sales in 2016. And this, 98% of all ginseng exported from the U.S. is produced in the badger state, mostly in Marathon County, where the President of the Ginseng Board of Wisconsin, Bob Kaldunski joins us now. He was in China meeting with potential new distributors with news broke of that country’s retaliatory measures. Bob, thanks for being here.

Bob Kaldunski:

Yes. You’re welcome. Thank you. Glad to be here.

Frederica Freyberg:

So what was your reaction to these Chinese tariffs?

Bob Kaldunski:

At first we weren’t quite sure what to think of it. We do have a tariff already. The Chinese government does have a tariff on our ginseng coming in. It does vary. And it sounds–can vary but it seems too we get different words, different information on the tariff already existing. It’s about 15% currently. There’s also a 5% VAT tax. Above that now, we’re going to get another 15%. So our concern is we already have the ginseng that is — it’s a premium product. It’s the ginseng the consumer prefers. They recognize it as being a high value ginseng on the market. Now we’ve put another 15% goes on top of that. We are concerned that the consumer will turn and look to a cheaper source of ginseng.

Frederica Freyberg:

So how much could that hurt Wisconsin farmers, this additional tariff?

Bob Kaldunski:

It's really difficult to say at this point. The way our industry is — operates. Our industry, our crop again, it’s a three to four or five-year crop that’s planted. So, you know, our crops are in the ground. We harvest in fall, late fall. And our crop does not hit the market or is not purchased, go through the market until November, December. So we’re about seven months out from that kind of a market. Most of this year’s crop has already been purchased and distributed. The Chinese, the big Chinese — the culture is they gift, a lot of gifting. And that’s where we’re going to see the biggest decrease, we feel. Again, we’re not certain how it’s going to exactly affect the market. But Christmas, the New Year. The Chinese New Year, gifting is very popular. The e-commerce is a big part of that. And the other part of that is also the consumer here in the United States. The families, they come over here, visit, and they buy, purchase, take gifts back. Or they do purchase in the China market and gift it. So it’s really difficult at this point how it’s going to affect us, how much just because we’re not certain yet what’s going to be and how it’s all going to play out yet.

Frederica Freyberg:

You were talking about how Wisconsin ginseng is kind of a premium product. Why is that and how is it different from what’s produced in Asian countries?

Bob Kaldunski:

The ginseng that the United States–Wisconsin ginseng is premium because of the ginsenosides. It carries typically a higher ginsenoside, which is the active ingredient. That’s the bitterness. It’s recognized by the Asian culture as the high quality. It’s the yin to the yang. It’s bittersweet and that’s comes–that’s unique to Wisconsin because of our soils. Our cool soils are that mineral-rich soils the glaciers have deposited in the past. The warm growing days, the cool night and the slow-growing. They recognize that as the product of choice for when they’re using it for their health benefits. Things like that.

Frederica Freyberg:

The Chinese imposition of these tariffs was apparently retaliatory for those the U.S. imposed. Even today the sides are ratcheting up the tariff threats. What do you make of this brewing trade war?

Bob Kaldunski:

I'm going to let that up to the politicians. There’s nothing we can say or do. We are a $20 million plus export. It’s really small compared to a lot of the other commodities that are being exchanged, that have a lot bigger impact. I guess some of the things we want to focus on now that it’s been brought to light is that there’s issues with labeling, issues with export/import. We’d like to bring that to light and ride this with our Department of Agriculture and see if we can’t correct those things to help our industry. Those are things that we can do, that we can help our industry do. I personally do think that the industry or the trade war or that discussion, they’ll work it out. And my hope and my thinking is they’ll–we’ll be better trade partners at the end of this. But right now I'm not sure what we can do to change it ourselves.

Frederica Freyberg:

Yeah. What are you telling growers and those connected to the ginseng trade in Wisconsin about all of this?

Bob Kaldunski:

Mostly we’re telling the growers just be patient. We really don’t know the effect of this yet. Though we–if it does stay, we do feel there’ll be some downward pressure. But we also are getting word from purchaser/buyers that they’re not really talking about it. They’re not using it at this point. They’re saying there will be a decrease in the price. I guess our fear would be is if it were to be long-term, the pipeline or the distribution of ginseng could kind of slow up a little bit which would then put pressure on the price to go down. Ginseng is definitely a supply and demand commodity.

Frederica Freyberg:

We'll be watching. Good luck to all the growers and people involved in the business. Bob Kaldunski, thanks very much.

Bob Kaldunski:

Thank you very much.

Frederica Freyberg:

A closer look now at potential changes to the federal program that feeds people. Over 650,000 people in Wisconsin receive food stamps or, as the program is called here, FoodShare. The Trump Administration has looked at cutting those benefit. At one point suggesting providing recipients with nonperishable food boxes instead of money to purchase items at a grocery store. Marisa Wojcik reports on how disagreement between Republicans and Democrats has stalled progress on the new Farm Bill, which funds the supplemental nutrition assistance program.

Marisa Wojcik:

Bipartisan talks around the 2018 farm bill have slowed recently, in part because republicans are looking to trim the federal deficit by making cuts to food assistance. What used to be known as food stamps is now the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. That program makes up 80% of spending represented in the Farm Bill. Budget cuts to SNAP could be a moving target because, as executive director of Feeding Wisconsin says, the cost of providing SNAP goes up or down depending on the need.

David Lee:

When people are poor and when they need help and when they’re income-eligible, they qualify for benefits. That’s why the program is described as being elastic.

Marisa Wojcik:

At the program’s peak, 47.6 million Americans received SNAP benefits in 2013 when the country was still in economic recovery. Since then that number has dropped by 13% and the federal government has distributed $12 billion less in SNAP benefits. Despite the program naturally contracting, House Speaker Paul Ryan says he expects more. He states on his website that SNAP increasingly serves as a replacement to work and should be reformed to improve work requirements. As for replacing food stamps with a food box, the federal government already does that for seniors. But there’s also concern that those boxes made up of surplus commodities that include cans of veggies, cheese, protein, juice, dry milk, cereal and pasta, could be discontinued. The proposal to replace SNAP benefits with what’s referred to as America's harvest box would not include fresh foods.

David Lee:

From everything we know and everything we’ve been hearing about, it is a commodity food box, which is a staple box of commodity goods.

Marisa Wojcik:

Many of the logistics behind packaging and distributing the harvest boxes would fall onto food banks.

Dan Stein:

That's one challenge: the sheer quantity that would be required in the harvest box. We estimate maybe 50,000 boxes would be necessary in the 16 counties we serve.

Marisa Wojcik:

Meanwhile, as disagreements among lawmakers in Washington continue, the 2014 Farm Bill is set to expire at the end of September.

Frederica Freyberg:

An international delegation toured Wisconsin this week to see how the state is embracing what’s known as trauma-informed care. First Lady Tonette Walker traveled with a group from Oslo, Norway to visit locations in Waupaca, Keshena and Milwaukee to see how such care is being implemented in social service, school and treatment settings. The Norwegians also made stops in Madison, including at an innovative new preschool which helps young students from diverse backgrounds, including those who are homeless, flourish and learn.

Frederica Freyberg:

The Playing Field school in Madison opened its doors in 2016. This week, the school opened its doors to visiting policymakers and educators from Norway. They came to see how a nurturing staff guides children ranging in age from infant to pre-K in the lessons of trust, caring and emotional connections.

Teacher:

You want to fix my hair?

Frederica Freyberg:

The school says its model is intentionally built to promote attachment between child and caregiver to build resilience. Many of the children there have trauma in their lives, whether homelessness or being removed from parents. They play and learn alongside children from all economic backgrounds. The methods are good for everyone. The vice-mayor of Oslo described why Wisconsin is becoming a model for trauma-informed care.

Oslo Vice Mayor:

I think more and more people are actually looking to Wisconsin and seeing that, oh, wow, something’s happening there and it works.

Frederica Freyberg:

We asked the Playing Field’s director whether she’s surprised her preschool is being held out for international attention.

Preschool Director:

I think it’s kind of unexpected, that we would — I mean, we knew when we started we wanted to build a model program and I know that what we’re doing is ahead of the curve. But it’s kind of surprising to get that kind of acknowledgment and that recognition.

Preschool Girl:

It's a rainbow! Red, orange.

Frederica Freyberg:

The Wisconsin tour for the visiting Norwegians was organized to highlight trauma-informed care, an issue that Tonette Walker has taken on as an initiative called “Fostering Futures.”

Now to the controversy surrounding Sinclair Broadcast Group. The corporation owns television stations that reach 40% of American households. This week a compilation video of the company’s prescripted and some say partisan “must use” announcement surfaced. The company required local anchors to read the announcement on air. The script contained language that critics say legitimizes the idea of fake news.

TV anchor:

Sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.

Various TV anchors:

Sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets publish …

Frederica Freyberg:

We take this up with media scholar and UW-Madison School of Journalism Professor Lew Friedland. And thanks for being here.

Lew Friedland:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

Sinclair had their TV anchors, as we’ve just suggested, read this “must use” statement decrying fake news on the part of other operations. What's your reaction to that?

Lewis Friedland:

Well, my first reaction is is that it’s a — Sinclair is taking this a bridge further than it already has. As you probably know, they have “must carries” that come out of their Maryland headquarters multiple times a week. At least nine times a week just for editorials. So it wasn’t anything completely new. But it is, to my knowledge, unprecedented in the history of American broadcasting for one central group, to have all of its anchors read a clearly political statement simultaneously on 173 stations. It’s never happened before.

Frederica Freyberg:

So you say that it’s clearly political. Could not it be construed as we’re just saying that we report the facts and we do our due diligence as journalists?

Lewis Friedland:

Sure. I mean, I think it was written in a way to give them a certain level of deniability. But the facts don’t really support that. The statement itself clearly conforms with the political line that President Trump and his spokespersons who’ve been promulgating for virtually since before the election, that the news is fake. It’s fake news out there. You can’t trust what’s on news. And that’s not really a kind of neutral statement, to be honest.

Frederica Freyberg:

Now, you were a commercial news executive in Wisconsin. Had corporate told you that you had to air such a thing, what would you have done?

Lewis Friedland:

You know, I've thought about that. And I had a young child at the time when I was an exec in Milwaukee. I’d like to think I would have quit. It’s easy to say for me now. But I would have — I would hope I would have quit.

Frederica Freyberg:

Sinclair has six stations in the Wisconsin television market. One of which is in Madison, which apparently defied the “must use” order and did not air this thing. What do you think is going to happen to them?

Lewis Friedland:

It's interesting. The station is under management of a very award-winning, solid news operation here in Madison. So they aren’t really an independent Sinclair news operation in that sense. They might lose their contract at some point. I don’t know. But that’s purely speculative, I have to say.

Frederica Freyberg:

Now, you mentioned this a little bit earlier, but, again, this isn’t new for Sinclair. They mandate these editorials by Donald Trump’s former campaign senior adviser. Does this blur the line between news, and opinion, and politics?

Lewis Friedland:

Absolutely. It completely blurs the line between news, opinion and politics. And we think the important issue to think about here is that, yes, we’ve had Fox News. We’ve had MSNBC. We have the cable environment. We have newspapers in which those lines have been–well, less newspapers but where the lines have been blurring in cable certainly for 20 plus years. But these are local broadcasters. These airwaves are owned by the public. They’re not owned by Sinclair. They’re not owned by the local stations. The station is not owned by the state of Wisconsin. It’s owned by the American public. And they hold those airwaves in trust. It’s a public trust. They do not have the right to simply propagate political viewpoints in a very limited broadcast space in local communities at will. And that’s the difference.

Frederica Freyberg:

You say they don’t have the right. Are there laws regarding this?

Lewis Friedland:

That's an interesting question. There are — the Fairness Doctrine was repealed under Mark Fowler, President Reagan's FCC chair, I believe ’87. It could have been…I need to check my year. But — so since then, stations have not been required to air balanced viewpoints. However, there is still a public trust obligation. There’s still a licensing obligation. And there’s still the Doctrine of Localism, which says that stations have to operate in the interest of their local community. So I believe it wouldn’t — of the most salient issues on the table here is whether crowding out local news for national news, and not only national news, but national opinion that skews significantly to one side of the political spectrum, is actually serving local communities. There’s some new evidence that suggests that it’s not.

Frederica Freyberg:

Very briefly, less than 30 seconds left, there’s a merger in the works, too, between Sinclair and Tribune Media, which would make Sinclair even bigger, reaching like three of four households in the U.S. So this could be a blanket of coverage in this regard?

Lewis Friedland:

They would be the largest broadcast — they are the largest broadcast group in the United States. They would become the largest by far, more than doubling their current reach. I think that every American has to ask themselves, do you want one company in 215 communities in the United States broadcasting what is effectively, truly one-sided opinion for one political party.

Frederica Freyberg:

Professor Lew Friedland, thank you very much.

Lewis Friedland:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

Now for an update out of Milwaukee, where the Milwaukee public school superintendent resigned this week for a job as CEO of United Way in southeastern Michigan. Darienne Driver, who has been head of Milwaukee Public Schools since 2014 called the move “bittersweet.” In a statement, Driver says of the Milwaukee community that she has, “great admiration for so many of you and I’m proud of the accomplishments we received together.” Driver will return to Detroit, where she began her career as a teacher. And that is our program for tonight. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a great weekend.

Announcer:

Funding for “Here and Now” is provided, in part, by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.

For more information on “Here and Now’s” 2018 election coverage, go to WisconsinVote.org.